Daniël Mantione wrote:
Op Fri, 18 Jan 2008, schreef Vinzent Höfler:
Maybe my view is skewed too much by the use of Ada where even a
function declares a "record identifier". In Ada it is even possible to
do:
---
procedure Test is
X : Integer;
procedure B is
X : Integer;
begin
X := 1;
Test.X := 2; -- references X of "Test" procedure
end B;
begin
X := 3;
end Test;
---
There is fundamental problem which such a construct even using normal
Pascal scoping rules. The identifier "test" in this case, is in the
symtable of procedure B, which is a deeper lexical level, thus can hide
global identifiers.
Yes. That's precisely why in Ada you have to write "Test.X" to go up
that "lexical level". The hiding happens here, too - but you have the
possibility to explicitely override it.
(Let's put aside the fact, that such constructs are usually bad coding
style.)
On the other hand:
uses a;
var a:byte;
... both unit a as variable a would go into the global symtable, which
is the same lexical level, thus causing duplicate identifier conflicts.
In Ada the fully qualified name of the variable would be "A.A" here.
I certainly see the problems for the (Pascal) compiler write here, but
from a user's point of view this identifier is in no way different than
"SysUtils.Sleep".
Vinzent.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
